Not 100% sure whether to buy.

Well mostly just wanting to ask other's opinions;
Stopped by one of the local used computer shops, and after talking a while one of the employees there was selling his old computer now that he just upgraded to a 2500k and a gtx 680. He is selling his old rig which has the follwing;
Phenom X4 9600 Black Edition OC'd with a low-profile cooler at 2.8ghz
XFX ATX AM2+ motherboard: XFX MDA72P7509 AM2+/AM2 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI HDM...
EVGA 470 superclocked: EVGA 012-P3-1472-AR GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) SuperC...
Rosewill PSU: Rosewill Green Series RG630-S12 630W Continuous @4... (not sure if this is the exact one, listed as rosewill green series on the side but I thought it was a 650watt.)
4GB DDR2-1066 RAM
500GB WD 7200rpm HDD\
Windows XP
in an Antec 300 case.
He is also offering a 3 year warranty on it through the shop.

He is offering it to me for $600. I think it's a decent deal given the price, seeing as my current computer is not a gaming machine by far.
What do you guys think? Should I get it or keep saving up for a new rig?
He is also offering me the 470 on it's own with a 3 year warranty for $175.

So really I'm stuck between this and the rig I was planning on with all new parts for ~800 so yeah. Either way I'm either making payments on the computer from the shop or saving up for my build with a PII X4 960t and a Radeon HD 7850.

I would pass on that rig. Cost is way too high for an old DDR2 system with a Phenom I CPU. Save up for what you want and keep an eye out for some of your parts here... you can find some good deals in the B/S/T threads.

I would pass on that rig. Cost is way too high for an old DDR2 system with a Phenom I CPU. Save up for what you want and keep an eye out for some of your parts here... you can find some good deals in the B/S/T threads.

Click to expand...

what about buying the 470 on it's own? Given the 3 year warranty on it and all.

last generation and power hungry IMO. I would recommend nothing older than AMD 6xxx series or NVidia 5xx series. A brand new 6870 can be had for around that price with a manufacturers warranty

Click to expand...

Well I know it's power hungry to an ungodly extent, however it is DX 11 capable so I was considering it as it was an EVGA.
And eh for $75 ish more I get a 7850 which is what I was planning on anyhow so yeah I think I'll go for the 7850 still.

I knew I was being bugged about it, yet it seemed like a good deal still. I guess it is probably just because I'm impatient to have a computer actually capable of playing Crysis 2 at playable settings

Well I know it's power hungry to an ungodly extent, however it is DX 11 capable so I was considering it as it was an EVGA.
And eh for $75 ish more I get a 7850 which is what I was planning on anyhow so yeah I think I'll go for the 7850 still.

I knew I was being bugged about it, yet it seemed like a good deal still. I guess it is probably just because I'm impatient to have a computer actually capable of playing Crysis 2 at playable settings

Click to expand...

Good decision

Post a WTB thread here when you're ready and you may be surprised by what kinds of deals you can pick up.

If you could get that for $400 it would be alright i guess but that Rosewill PSU is junk and the 470 is getting "dated", there are better GFX choice's for your $175 budget i think. Hell you can prolly get a 480 or a 5870 for less than $175 and both of those are quite an improvement compared to the 470 i would think.

But realistically if you want to keep your system for a while getting a DDR2 rig now would really be limiting yourself IMHO, if you saved up a lil' longer and started out with a DDR3 & 7850 (or equivalent Nvidia) i think you would be much better off in the long run

With the upcoming Ivy Bridge cpus from Intel, you will surely be able to pick up a second hand i5-2500k or i7-2600k and Z68 motherboards fairly cheap due to all the Ivy Bridge adopters.

So if your keen for a new PC wait till the end of this month and I honestly think you will strike gold with the TPU B/S/T threads

Also, The 7870 will be greatly superior to the 470, definitely wait instead of buying a redundant card that you would soon replace. If you have $140 lying around to buy old tech, put it along with your 7870 budget and upgrade to a 7950

Skip this 'deal'.
I used to own a Phenom I X4 9600 BE, it was pretty piss-poor. Throw in the TLB error bug and patch, then you lose some performace on an already mediocre cpu.
I bought that CPU and complete platform due to some advice from a friend, who happens to be a die-hard fanboy. I don't ask him about build advice anymore.

Just build a new rig. You should be able to get an i5-2500k or 2550k, and build a great system around that cpu for your budget.

As an AMD "fanboy" I don't buy Intel CPUs (unless offered to me at such an insanely low price I would be an idiot not to buy. i.e. a 2500k for the same price~+$10 for example. Which I might see at the end of the month.), but yeah I figure I'll stick with going with a PII X4 AM3+ build, and should Piledriver performance be anything decent enough to warrant an upgrade, upgrade my CPU next year.
@ Huddo I said 7850 not 7870 lol. Doesn't really matter that much though.

You can get a 2500k for around $200 new if you shop around. You might even be able to get it cheaper.
As long as you don't play CPU limited games, an AMD system will still get the job donw.
But avoid that first-gen Phenom system, trust me.

As an AMD "fanboy" I don't buy Intel CPUs (unless offered to me at such an insanely low price I would be an idiot not to buy. i.e. a 2500k for the same price~+$10 for example. Which I might see at the end of the month.), but yeah I figure I'll stick with going with a PII X4 AM3+ build, and should Piledriver performance be anything decent enough to warrant an upgrade, upgrade my CPU next year.
@ Huddo I said 7850 not 7870 lol. Doesn't really matter that much though.

Click to expand...

If you really are an AMD fanboy you wouldn't have any doubts in buying the old rig.

If you really are an AMD fanboy you wouldn't have any doubts in buying the old rig.

Click to expand...

I get called one rather often for saying I'd buy a Phenom II X4 and put the extra $75-100 into a better GPU right now, and later upgrade to Piledriver and hopefully get more or less the same performance when it is needed - in the future. And that I prefer to buy AMD on an ethical basis.
Oh and that I have a tendency when making suggestions to suggest both an Intel and an AMD version of a build and toss in info on the ethics, as well as performance. lol

Environmental record
In 2003, there were 1.4 tons of carbon tetrachloride measured from one of Intel's many acid scrubbers. However, Intel reported no release of carbon tetrachloride for all of 2003.[139] Intel's facility in Rio Rancho, New Mexico overlooks a nearby village, and the hilly contours of its location create a setting for chemical gases heavier than air to move along arroyos and irrigation ditches in that village. Release of chemicals in such an environment reportedly caused adverse effects in both animals and humans. Deceased dogs in the area were found to have high levels of toluene, hexane, ethylbenzene, and xylene isomers in lungs.[140] More than 1,580 pounds (720 kg) of VOC were released in June and July 2006, the company stated.[141] Intel’s environmental performance is published annually in their corporate responsibility report.[142]
[edit]Religious controversy
Orthodox Jews have protested against Intel operating in Israel on Saturday, Shabbat. Intel ringed its office with barbed wire before the protest, but there was no violence.[143] As of December 2009, the situation has been stable for Intel Israel while some employees reported working overtime on Shabbat.
[edit]Age discrimination
Intel has faced complaints of age discrimination in firing and layoffs. Intel was sued by nine former employees, over allegations that they were laid off because they were over the age of 40.[144]
A group called FACE Intel (Former and Current Employees of Intel) claims that Intel weeds out older employees. FACE Intel claims that more than 90 percent of people who have been terminated by Intel are over the age of 40. Upside magazine requested data from Intel breaking out its hiring and terminations by age, but the company declined to provide any.[145] Intel has denied that age plays any role in Intel's employment practices.[146] FACE Intel was founded by Ken Hamidi, who was terminated by Intel in 1995 at the age of 47.[145] Hamidi was blocked in a 1999 court decision from using Intel's email system to distribute criticism of the company to employees.[147]
[edit]Competition

Further information: Semiconductor sales leaders by year
In the 1980s, Intel was among the top ten sellers of semiconductors (10th in 1987) in the world. In 1991, Intel became the biggest chip maker by revenue and has held the position ever since. Other top semiconductor companies include TSMC, Advanced Micro Devices, Samsung, Texas Instruments, Toshiba and STMicroelectronics.
Competitors in PC chip sets include AMD, VIA Technologies, SiS, and Nvidia. Intel's competitors in networking include Freescale, Infineon, Broadcom, Marvell Technology Group and AMCC, and competitors in flash memory include Spansion, Samsung, Qimonda, Toshiba, STMicroelectronics, and Hynix.
The only major competitor in the x86 processor market is Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), with which Intel has had full cross-licensing agreements since 1976: each partner can use the other's patented technological innovations without charge after a certain time.[148] However, the cross-licensing agreement is canceled in the event of an AMD bankruptcy or takeover.[149] Some smaller competitors such as VIA and Transmeta produce low-power x86 processors for small factor computers and portable equipment.
[edit]Lawsuits
Intel has often been accused by competitors of using legal claims to thwart competition. Intel claims that it is defending its intellectual property. Intel has been plaintiff and defendant in numerous legal actions.
In September 2005, Intel filed a response to an AMD lawsuit,[150] disputing AMD's claims, and claiming that Intel's business practices are fair and lawful. In a rebuttal, Intel deconstructed AMD's offensive strategy and argued that AMD struggled largely as a result of its own bad business decisions, including underinvestment in essential manufacturing capacity and excessive reliance on contracting out chip foundries.[151] Legal analysts predicted the lawsuit would drag on for a number of years, since Intel's initial response indicated its unwillingness to settle with AMD.[152][153] In 2008 a court date was finally set,[154] but in 2009 Intel settled with a $1.25 billion payout to AMD (see below).[155]
In October 2006, a Transmeta lawsuit was filed against Intel for patent infringement on computer architecture and power efficiency technologies.[156] The lawsuit was settled in October 2007, with Intel agreeing to pay US$150 million initially and US$20 million per year for the next five years. Both companies agreed to drop lawsuits against each other, while Intel was granted a perpetual non-exclusive license to use current and future patented Transmeta technologies in its chips for 10 years.[157]
On November 4, 2009, New York's attorney general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel Corp, claiming the company used "illegal threats and collusion" to dominate the market for computer microprocessors.
On November 12, 2009, AMD agreed to drop the antitrust lawsuit against Intel in exchange for $1.25 billion.[155] A joint press release published by the two chip makers stated "While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development."[158][159]
[edit]Anti-competitive allegations
See also: AMD v. Intel
[edit]Japan
In 2005, the local Fair Trade Commission found that Intel violated the Japanese Antimonopoly Act. The commission ordered Intel to eliminate discounts that had discriminated against AMD. To avoid a trial, Intel agreed to comply with the order.[160][161][162][163]
[edit]European Union
In July 2007, the European Commission accused Intel of anti-competitive practices, mostly against AMD.[164] The allegations, going back to 2003, include giving preferential prices to computer makers buying most or all of their chips from Intel, paying computer makers to delay or cancel the launch of products using AMD chips, and providing chips at below standard cost to governments and educational institutions.[165] Intel responded that the allegations were unfounded and instead qualified its market behavior as consumer-friendly.[165] General counsel Bruce Sewell responded that the Commission had misunderstood some factual assumptions as to pricing and manufacturing costs.[166]
In February 2008, Intel stated that its office in Munich had been raided by European Union regulators. Intel reported that it was cooperating with investigators.[167] Intel faced a fine of up to 10% of its annual revenue, if found guilty of stifling competition.[168] AMD subsequently launched a website promoting these allegations.[169][170] In June 2008, the EU filed new charges against Intel.[171] In May 2009, the EU found that Intel had engaged in anti-competitive practices and subsequently fined Intel €1.06 billion (US$1.44 billion), a record amount. Intel was found to have paid companies, including Acer, Dell, HP, Lenovo and NEC,[172] to exclusively use Intel chips in their products, and therefore harmed other companies including AMD.[172][173][174] The European Commission said that Intel had deliberately acted to keep competitors out of the computer chip market and in doing so had made a "serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules".[172] In addition to the fine, Intel was ordered by the Commission to immediately cease all illegal practices.[172] Intel has stated that they will appeal against the Commission's verdict.[172]
[edit]South Korea
In September 2007, South Korean regulators accused Intel of breaking antitrust law. The investigation began in February 2006, when officials raided Intel's South Korean offices. The company risked a penalty of up to 3% of its annual sales, if found guilty.[175] In June 2008, the Fair Trade Commission ordered Intel to pay a fine of US$25.5 million for taking advantage of its dominant position to offer incentives to major Korean PC manufacturers on the condition of not buying products from AMD.[176]
[edit]United States
New York started an investigation of Intel in January 2008 on whether the company violated antitrust laws in pricing and sales of its microprocessors.[177] In June 2008, the Federal Trade Commission also began an antitrust investigation of the case.[178] In December 2009 the FTC announced it would initiate an administrative proceeding against Intel in September 2010.[179][180][181][182]
In November 2009, following a two year investigation, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sued Intel, accusing them of bribery and coercion, claiming that Intel bribed computer makers to buy more of their chips than those of their rivals, and threatened to withdraw these payments if the computer makers were perceived as working too closely with its competitors. Intel has denied these claims.[183]
On July 22, 2010, Dell agreed to a settlement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to pay $100M in penalties resulting from charges that Dell did not accurately disclose accounting information to investors. In particular, the SEC charged that from 2002 to 2006, Dell had an agreement with Intel to receive rebates in exchange for not using chips manufactured by AMD. These substantial rebates were not disclosed to investors, but were used to help meet investor expectations regarding the company's financial performance; the SEC said that in the first quarter of 2007 they amounted to 70% of Dell's operating income. Dell eventually did adopt AMD as a secondary supplier in 2006, and Intel subsequently stopped their rebates, causing Dell's financial performance to fall.[184][185][186]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel#Anti-competitive_allegations
whereas AMD's only splotch on their record I'm aware of is the MMX trademark/copywrite thing and pricing the original FX processors at $1000.